Did Russia "hack" the election? Four questions.

[Constructive Anarchy]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

President Trump should order a full investigation to uncover the identities of every nation involved in hacking US government websites and private communications. Lets presume Russia has an interest in effecting US elections. Are there other nations whose governments might be interested in effecting US elections? A better question might be: Are there any nations whose governments wouldn't be interested in effecting US elections? Would China be interested? How about North Korea? Iran? Israel? France? How about Saudi Arabia? I think Americans deserve to know about every nation involved in hacking and possibly influencing our elections.

I think your stupid and trying to get as far away as possible that this was done for small Hands and the probable fact with his help, Small Hands is easily within that scum level to do it.

Who could possibly argue with such an eloquent rebuttal.

 

[tolumba21]

Is there a central claim, main idea and climax to this focus on Russian hacking the American elections, so I can write a critical essay?

Are there things that I need to compare and contrast?

Sent from my LG-D415 using Tapatalk

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Trump!! Russia!! Trump!!! Russia!!

 

[The Original Tree]

The answer is no. And besides that No voting machines were hacked and Hillary Clinton won The Popular Vote.
Dems like to say that a lot. So there was zero impact on the election by any so called hackers.

There was a major impact of New York and California with the Help of Dem Scum illegally registering Illegal Immigrants to vote through motor voter, illegally.

So maybe we need the Fake News Media to start talking about that and redeem themselves.

 

[jbander]

The answer is no. And besides that No voting machines were hacked and Hillary Clinton won The Popular Vote.
Dems like to say that a lot. So there was zero impact on the election by any so called hackers.

There was a major impact of New York and California with the Help of Dem Scum illegally registering Illegal Immigrants to vote through motor voter, illegally.

So maybe we need the Fake News Media to start talking about that and redeem themselves.

Zero impact of the election because of the hackers , step back and read that , that statement isn't yours , it comes from the propaganda side of the hate party, Fox Crap News or that big tub of goo and it is so stupid that you should be embarrassed. How stupid are you willing to be perceived to carry the hate party's line of bullshit. To me it looks like your all in.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

 

[Freewill]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

The left wing were in LOOOOOVE with the release of the Pentagon Papers. They loved forcing Nixon to turn over the tapes. they don't like it so much when it is they who have to be revealed.

 

[Kosh]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

No Russia did NOT hack the elections, they hacked the DNC (even a 14 year old could have hacked the DNC) as they do not believe in security, just like the unsecured server in the Clinton basement!

 

[Manonthestreet]

DNI Fails To Find Its Ass With Both Hands

DNI Fails To Find Its Ass With Both Hands

 

[jbander]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

Seems Russia hacked both parties but only shared what was harmful to Clinton, are you even going to suggest that the level of slime ball that small hands is ,there couldn't be found anything about the biggest scum bag in this country.

 

[jbander]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

The left wing were in LOOOOOVE with the release of the Pentagon Papers. They loved forcing Nixon to turn over the tapes. they don't like it so much when it is they who have to be revealed.

Lets go back in history and look at the gall of Brutus and Longinus killing Caesar. The hate party wining about one of the biggest haters unfare treatment , Poor Nixon. (the pile of shit)

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

Seems Russia hacked both parties but only shared what was harmful to Clinton, are you even going to suggest that the level of slime ball that small hands is ,there couldn't be found anything about the biggest scum bag in this country.

And again, when the NY Times dug up Trump's '95 tax returns, did they also dig up dirt on Hillary?

When ABC News released the grab 'em by the pussy hot mic tape, did they dig up dirt on Hillary?

If only digging into one candidate is tantamount to hacking our election, then were these organizations guilty of treason? After all, private organizations within the country are no more allowed to "hack our democratic process" than entities outside the country, right?

 

[Dragonlady]

Given the lengths the RNC went to in order to prevent TrumpleThinSkin's nomination, you think there was nothing compromising in the RNC's emails trying to stop him?

The selective email leaks, Comey's letter, all part of a disinformation campaign against Clinton to sway undecideds, and it worked.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[tolumba21]

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

Yup everyones against you poor poor people , the press all of the media. They wrote those stories on those days because that information was received that day stupid. So are you saying that when someone shows a video of your psychopath doing what all psychopaths do, they have to dig around and find dirt on Clinton to balance the Psychopaths Video. Sorry but your psychopath has way more hate videos than Clinton.

Likewise, if somebody gets hold of a bunch of emails suggesting that the DNC cheated their own primaries and suggesting that higher ups in HRC's campaign are hateful bigots, is it wrong of them to release that information if they don't go out and search for dirt on Trump?

I'm not the one saying that everybody has to be even handed in leaking information, that's you jackasses telling us that Russia was wrong because they didn't also release information about Trump and the Republicans. My entire point is that disingenuous partisans like you can't seem to grasp that what Russia did was no different from what the NY Times and ABC News did. Frankly, in my opinion, so long as the information that's being released is accurate, FUCKING HAVE AT IT.

Don't try to paint this as me whining about being attacked, all I'm doing is demanding consistency from YOU whiners.

Seems Russia hacked both parties but only shared what was harmful to Clinton, are you even going to suggest that the level of slime ball that small hands is ,there couldn't be found anything about the biggest scum bag in this country.

And again, when the NY Times dug up Trump's '95 tax returns, did they also dig up dirt on Hillary?

When ABC News released the grab 'em by the pussy hot mic tape, did they dig up dirt on Hillary?

If only digging into one candidate is tantamount to hacking our election, then were these organizations guilty of treason? After all, private organizations within the country are no more allowed to "hack our democratic process" than entities outside the country, right?

Actually, the mentioning of 'grab them by the p-ssy' as you indicate came to an affirmation of a clip that was obtained by the Washington Post several months ago. It started in October.

Sent from my LG-D415 using Tapatalk

 

[Dragonlady]

There is no obligation on the part of the press to "dig up dirt" equally on all of the candidates. There is an obligation to investigate and to report what they find. If one candidate is going around doing and saying heinous things, you're suggesting that unless there is something equally compromising about the other candidate, they should keep that to themselves. It is the obligation of the press

But in the case of the Russians, they didn't release anything they found on the RNC computer or publish the RNC emails showing how the RNC tried to get change the rules to a "brokered convention" in order to stop Trump. There are serious infighting within the RNC about supporting Trump.

The Russians and Trump conducted a co-ordinated "disinformation" campaign against Clinton